Message from @Holo
Discord ID: 495745939714342912
^ her story
All persons do not remember incident (and swore on affidavits)
except her
Another thing you can do is the equilivancy test, ask them how they'd treat it if someone accused them of murder 30 something odd years ago and demanded they be put in jail
no evidence
everyone they claim as a witness denies it
and all they have is a bunch of people saying they 'believe' them
do you think it'll hold up in court?
Kavanaugh has a god damn diary for christs sake
This situation as it is is purely hearsay. What that means is that an investigation can’t produce any additional evidence besides verbal testimonies. It is literally Brett’s word against hers.
not true
like i just said, he has a diary
if it can be proved legit
he has an alibi
Well, memories from what, 35 years ago, in a traumatic event aren't very credible. Memories are susceptible to distortion, fading, corruption. Even in therapy sessions when patients are asked to recall events, their imaginations can add things that weren't actually there. Studies also show that trauma can cause people to embellish stories, and add details that didn't happen.
AND the fact that it's a woman makes it even less believable to me personally. They tend to exaggerate shit because they're fundamentally weak and rely on guile, emotion, and the good nature of morons that are very ready to believe her
its actually 4 against one
He's bought into the line "It's just a job interview."
The hard part is, he, like an asshole responded to 3 different comments in multiple parts. So, now I have to juggle all my arguments instead of responding all at once.
I'm almost thinking about just dropping the argument.
And he waited a full 24 hours to respond. And I know he went and did exactly what I'm doing now.
@RoadtoDawn actually i have a different reason for a woman, they tend to be more flowy, so when going to the therapist the therapist could easily ask questions to influence her memories
@Mongo Jongo here's a solid article on how false memories are created: http://staff.washington.edu/eloftus/Articles/sciam.htm
whereas a man would probably think more critically of the question
not assume you are correct
^
What I mean is that an investigation can’t provide any additional information than what we already have.
^
Now, if she said it happened last year
same details though, maybe just maybe
still bullshit
but at least you have a better headstart
but not even a place is impossible
That would be fundamentally different because it would be easier to vet
the United states is it's own fucking continent
most of the states are bigger than other countries
and you're telling the poor buggers in the FBI to search the entire state, assuming she can name one, for 30+ year old evidence
Therapy sessions can create false memories. I think this is what happened with the satanic panic.
This actually reminds me of a section of 12 Rules for Life
What does the person think the FBI is going to do?
Stall the confirmation <:PandaPancky:345073282682191873>
I actually mentioned that to the dude I was debating last night. If this happened 1 year ago, 5 years, maybe as far as 10 years ago, people wouldn't lend themselves much doubt in considering its credibility.
There's only so much 'ambiguity' i can handle before shit becomes bullshit
It would be a 100% certainty in most people's eyes